From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 64-bit unsigned integer?
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 16:04:04 -0600
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <p79tcl$keb$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <e8c6d243-b919-4fc5-a6dc-aeb5e2042be9@googlegroups.com>
 <421d1598-68d7-4d0b-b596-6e9c59cf865c@googlegroups.com>
 <a0147c10-775c-49bf-a0e7-2091f31ac11a@googlegroups.com>
 <p724lq$2na$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> <877eqxe7u8.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <p77dgq$i6o$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> <87muzsz6s2.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <ffpr62F1cdeU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:04:05 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="20939"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:50773
Date: 2018-03-01T16:04:04-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Niklas Holsti" <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ffpr62F1cdeU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 18-03-01 07:47 , Paul Rubin wrote:
>> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:
>>> One of the main reason for the change to libraries is that we have a 
>>> number
>>> of requests to add additional numeric functionality (unlimited-size 
>>> integers
>>> ["bignum"], saturation math)
>>
>> I'd imagine that in the Ada world, machine integers should have a more
>> primitive status than that of bignums.
>
> As long as the new numeric libraries let us write computations using the 
> normal algebraic syntax (A * B + C), I have nothing against library 
> solutions.

Of course. Ada allows operator overloading and is expected to allow numeric 
literal overloading, too.

>> That's because bignum arithmetic
>> can allocate hard-to-predict amounts of memory and take unknown runtime,
>> in tension with Ada's emphasis on resource control and realtime
>> predictability.
>
> Following the trend set by recent Ada standard extensions, there could be 
> a "bounded" version of the "bignum" library.

That's the plan for the integer version. To date, we haven't been able to 
figure out meaningful semantics for a bounded rational library, so we're not 
planning on one of those. (The problem being what to do when you reach the 
bounds. Some sort of rounding seems necessary, but that would violate the 
premise of extra mathmatical results.)

                             Randy.